TitusV wrote:Mages and other spell casters are not meant to go toe to toe with fighters all day. They can for a short period of time if they use their spells wisely. This proposal is trying to turn these classes into more head to head combatants. There are existing classes that excel at this already. Lets not morph every class to be jacks of all trades/master of none.

I think a Fighter should have the clear upper hand vs. a Mage in melee combat. However, I don't think that should be as extreme as robes vs. plate, either, unless the robes counted as AC 4, as I'd suggested another time.

Right now, it's either they Fireball in Steelskin until they run out of points, or they go AC 5 robes all day. I'd like to see a third option that was somewhat effective for the class.

TitusV wrote:I don't think that halving the casting cost of magic missile and making it white damage is the same as the current magic missile rule for a couple of reasons. A basic helmet, ie hide, would be able to absorb 1 white spell ball. The other is that it takes 2 hits for someone to effectively take the same amount of damage as a black hit. This gives the person 2 attempts to dodge the attacks. I don't see how the wand of gartan should be taken into consideration.

Read the rules more carefully; a hide helmet WILL stop a single Black right now.

The Wand of Gartan fires Magic Missiles. That's what the spell was patterned after, and it uses the same exact color spell ball & does the same exact thing. Making one white damage & one black damage would cause confusion, especially with the same color spellball flying in both cases.

TitusV wrote:My next comments are not meant to offend anyone. The passed couple of years Darkon has been proposing rules and passing rules that do not take the game as a whole into consideration. Iltz you said that you do not cast magic missile. You are only taking your own perspective into account. Inox, you are proposing 0 point headband armor when you play a lot of classes that use headband armor. We need to start thinking about how rules affect Darkon in a holistic sense.

Senators are meant to take their countries viewpoints to Senate. If they are not, that's a problem with your Senators. Saying rules changes don't reflect the realm doesn't carry a lot of weight with me when we're not proposing and voting on the same day. No one is having changes sneak up on them.

I also have written and/or proposed stuff that doesn't have to do with me (e.g. Ranger searching changes), or which actively works against how I like to fight (note that my new armor proposal makes head armor MORE effective vs. flails). I propose things based on what I generally feel is good for the game; that's all.

TitusV wrote:Classes should be different. This promotes roleplay, interaction, and problem solving. This is what Darkon is about. Classes are slowly merging towards some type of generic class that has fighting and magic casting abilities.

How so? I mean, sure, a Warrior Mage has both (with limitations), but that's kind of the point.

The Warrior Mage (then Fighter/Mage) from the early days of Darkon had Lightning Bolt & Ice Storm, Leather w/ any size round shield, and could use any weapon. If anything, I think we've broken out roles more clearly, setting the classes up to be specifically effective against certain others. More strategy is needed today than in 1989.

-Inox- wrote:I think a Fighter should have the clear upper hand vs. a Mage in melee combat. However, I don't think that should be as extreme as robes vs. plate, either, unless the robes counted as AC 4, as I'd suggested another time.

Right now, it's either they Fireball in Steelskin until they run out of points, or they go AC 5 robes all day. I'd like to see a third option that was somewhat effective for the class.

I hate to say it but, with great power comes great responsibility. I think that is part of the class. I am in agreement with the robes being AC4 since it adds to the atmosphere of the game.

-Inox- wrote:Read the rules more carefully; a hide helmet WILL stop a single Black right now.

The Wand of Gartan fires Magic Missiles. That's what the spell was patterned after, and it uses the same exact color spell ball & does the same exact thing. Making one white damage & one black damage would cause confusion, especially with the same color spellball flying in both cases.

[/quote]

My understanding of the armor rules is that a black to a hide helmet will result in a mortal wound. If that is not the case then I will recant my argument.

-Inox- wrote:Senators are meant to take their countries viewpoints to Senate. If they are not, that's a problem with your Senators. Saying rules changes don't reflect the realm doesn't carry a lot of weight with me when we're not proposing and voting on the same day. No one is having changes sneak up on them.

This is true and its partly my own fault for not attending senate or forcing the issue within my own country. That being said we will be attending senate more frequently in 2012. As far as magic missile goes I believe its true power will be shown during the first campout of the year.

-Inox- wrote:I also have written and/or proposed stuff that doesn't have to do with me (e.g. Ranger searching changes), or which actively works against how I like to fight (note that my new armor proposal makes head armor MORE effective vs. flails). I propose things based on what I generally feel is good for the game; that's all.

You are correct. In my typing furor I had a memory lapse. I apologize for my ad hominem attack

-Inox- wrote:How so? I mean, sure, a Warrior Mage has both (with limitations), but that's kind of the point.

The Warrior Mage (then Fighter/Mage) from the early days of Darkon had Lightning Bolt & Ice Storm, Leather w/ any size round shield, and could use any weapon. If anything, I think we've broken out roles more clearly, setting the classes up to be specifically effective against certain others. More strategy is needed today than in 1989.

I think that removing the spell point requirement effectively does morph magic using classes towards the direct combat side. The Warrior mage is the 3rd option that you were referring to earlier.

TitusV wrote:Iltz you said that you do not cast magic missile. You are only taking your own perspective into account.

I can assure you that to any actual mages (I'm excluding warrior mages) of any level higher than 10, it's probably a completely useless spell for the most part.

Where it shines, though, is at super low levels. What does a level 3 mage have? 9 spell points and two spells that do damage (burning hands and MM). They need to spend one point on their shield for the day. If magic missile cost anything, that means the player can basically do a class-specific thing 8 times and then that's it. That's rather boring for a player, I'd say. A cleric can at least fight in plate and have a tower shield if they run out of points. What can a mage do? Die a lot. And hell, if somebody dispels that shield, he's out another point (or he has no shield if he's out of points). Once that guy hits level 6, he's got some more offensive spells (ones that are far more useful, anyway) and he'll be casting them instead.

The only way to make it cost something and still make it worthwhile for ANYBODY to cast would be to completely revamp the current system and make some things cost 3, some cost 2 and things like that cost 1, meanwhile making more points available over all. That would modify the entire system overall in a way that not much would change for most players, but the lowest players would get more out of it (and then this pretty useless spell would cost something).

I agree with most of what else you said, save the bit about the wand. It factors in because the spell balls are both black and it is casting magic missile. To have two different spells that are the same thing and do different damages would probably be confusing, which I imagine is what the person mentioning it was getting at.

The Amazing Iltztafein of House Dubh - CBLet me show you a magic trick...I'll make your money... DISAPPEAR!

I have no problem with magic missile. It is meant for low level players to have something aside from no armor and a small ass buckler to actually contribute to fighting. It is blocked by shields, and can be dodged. Unlike the gartan wand, you have only 5 steps to take when you cast it, and if you let a mage hit you in the face with it, sorry, its your fault.

I am not in favor of dumping AOE at all, however I see the merit in making SOME bridge battles into an aoeless melee fest, instead of an aoe filled fireball toss. As one of 2 event marshalls, I promise I shall enforce these rules for at least part of any bridge battle we do to try to make everyone happy.

As a mage, id love to get rid of spell points, however as a player of the game, I understand why they are there, to keep people from casting fireballs for an entire campout siege. I currently do not know of a "better" way to run our magic system than with spell points, and there are easy ways to track them for the caster in question.

Lastly we JUST got rid of mage robes. lets drop the ac4 robe talk as i for one dont want to wear them anymore. steelskin is not overpowered. i see plenty of mages dead every two team battle. just because inox the mage can kill steve the fighter in plate doesnt mean every mage in steelskin is better than a fighter in plate.

I think that things that make the game more balanced are great. Although I am agaist the removal of head armor. Fact is some people can't bear the physical burden of wearing armor and have chosen to play a class that allows balance to them. It seems that magis in general has been under the microscope for some time now.

The abilities that different classes have round the game. It is loosly based on D&D and the spell point system keeps it ture to that nature. A mage can only memorise a finite number of spells per day, a cleric must pray and prepare spells in a similar fashion.

There are plenty of people that enjoy the game as it is. Constant tweaking and rule changes make it difficult to keep current. The game has been sucessful for a long time. I understand changing things to better the game from time to time, but sometimes the never ending changes get old, not saying just saying. Keep it simple and fun. If it is not broken , why are we trying to fix it. The fact that a headband doesn't "LOOK GOOD" is kinda silly, man dudes are out there in sneakers and sweat pants with cloth wrapped over their feet to try to be period. A headband is the least of our fashion worries.

Dienekes Of LaconiaEphorSlayer of The Spider PriestHigh Priest Of TharrosVoice of The CouncilKing Of Laconia

Sir Tyriel Firebrand wrote:I still think we should make the headbands armbands.

That way, when someone's wearing Missile Ward and sharkmail, then they cast Growth from a scroll, they can have red on grey, green, and white armbands! All of which are covered by a protection from fire cape.

Sir Gwydion, Baron of GladesedgeSometime mistaken for Avlis, Ranger of the Woods of Elidor (also of Gladesedge)

The only reason the game "works" today is because we haven't been afraid of making changes. Continuous changes are the hallmark of Darkon, from its inception until now.

Because I've been around since the beginning (~3 months after the first event), I have seen several waves of people come and go over the years, and it's funny how each new group of vets starts to become largely allergic to change over time, and fondly remembers their "early" days, when Darkon was "fun" and "just worked", and people "weren't so caught up on rules changes".

It's almost trite.

It's kind of how each generation has their own music that their parents don't get or like, and then usually before they themselves are 40, they can't groove to current popular genres. Rinse, repeat...next in line, please.

There was no time when we had something perfect, and even when things have been close to ideal, they still needed to be adjusted later. What works for events with 30-40 people doesn't necessarily work for events with 200-300 (see: Trail Adventures - which is a shame, because those were fun.) Darkon's been stumbling around for years trying to figure out how to regain a dungeon-like feel on campouts & adventures when you have vast hordes of people to contend with. The answer has been largely checkpoints and mods, but those are obviously imperfect solutions, and we still need better answers.

Further, some of what works well when the game's been going for a few years works far less well when it's been going for 26. Or, you know, it's different because we have adults actually running this as a legal corporation now, rather than teens doing it informally. Or, changes were needed because things were unsafe as hell. Etc. etc. (see: FIreball @ 4th rank, super-easy Nobility qualification after 10 battles, people starting to play the game at 12 years old, face-legal missile weapons, coverless axes with electrical taped-up inflexible blades, Time Stop, etc.) We of course still have a problem with disproportionate & unbalancing wealth accrued by older countries under the land rules...among other things.

Finally, what interests one generation doesn't necessarily interest the next in the same way (or at all). Hell, even D&D largely got rid of the memorization mechanic (i.e. lousy Vancian casting). Getting away from tired RPG tropes keeps up interest over time for new blood. Keep in mind, a lot of of how we initially chose to do things came about in the translation of moving from tabletop to live-action. It was pure guesswork, and involved a lot of pragmatic compromise that tended toward suspension of disbelief. We had to "make do". In the decades since then, a lot more people have been this sort of thing worldwide, and there are often better answers, props, and techniques available. We need to keep agile to stay vital.

So, in closing, we have to be willing to constantly reevaluate how we do things, and to tweak abilities or other rules when they become cumbersome, unsafe, and/or unbalancing. We need to add things to the game that we suspect will enrich it.

Sir Tyriel Firebrand wrote:I still think we should make the headbands armbands.

That way, when someone's wearing Missile Ward and sharkmail, then they cast Growth from a scroll, they can have red on grey, green, and white armbands! All of which are covered by a protection from fire cape.

Well, obviously it would require some thought. We can't just throw everything together & hope for the best.

We could work up something, though. Off the top of my head (and I am going to use the AC system I am going to propose to illustrate):

Monks - Grey armband with one or two blue dots (Leather Skin or Ironskin)Druids - Add a large white dot for Barkskin to whatever armor armband they are wearingMages - Grey armband with one or two black dots (Stoneskin or Steelskin)Warrior Mages - Add a red dot to whatever armband they otherwise wear (Missile Ward)

Armbands must all be at least 2" and lie flat.Dots must all be at least 1" and highly visible with good contrast (e.g. not faded, peeling, etc.)

Easy.

You could even take the 5 protective cloaks and make them into a separate armband.

Seems like what you proposed is making things more complicated. That's one reason why I am against that system.

However, my main beef is that armbands are easy to hide.Capes and head bands are easy to spot. Armbands are difficult to see because they can be blocked by weapons or shields. I will change my tactics depending on what I see. Yes I also understand that nothing is keeping someone from holding a shield in front of their head to cover their head band but that is giving themselves a disadvantage.

To be honest I don't think it will be all that bad. I think the reason no one looks at armbands for armor, is because most of the time you can see what people are wearing. I know I don't look at armbands because of that and I would suspect thats the thought of most players.

The reason we think its easier to look at headbands is because thats where we have trained our eyes to look. If we did that for armbands, it would be just as easy I think. You could also say that the armband must be on the upper portion of your sword arm. This way it cannot be hidden by a shield. (at least passively)

~No Quarter!~~Warriors Guild~~Knight of Tuesday~~"Winning is teaching, losing is learning"~

Inox, I agree fully in all that you are saying after reading your last post. I understand and support keeping the game up to date and making some changes. Take a look at some of the larps in europe if you want a taste of what it could become. Those guys are using movie quality stuff and taking it to the next level for sure.

Headbands are ,in my humble opinion, are best at this point. They are easily seen and give the mage some sort of protection against physical attacks. By no means do I think we should allow things to become stagnant. Just feel that the changes we make should be looked at in all directions and only made when they have been deemed good for the balance and flow of the game.

Dienekes Of LaconiaEphorSlayer of The Spider PriestHigh Priest Of TharrosVoice of The CouncilKing Of Laconia

Dude, mages would still have steelskin. It would just be on their arm and not their head. I think that making the headbands armbands would make it easier to see what your up against. Instead of having to look at someones head and arm you just look at their arm. It would also make pictures look better.

~No Quarter!~~Warriors Guild~~Knight of Tuesday~~"Winning is teaching, losing is learning"~

Sir Tyriel Firebrand wrote:To be honest I don't think it will be all that bad. I think the reason no one looks at armbands for armor, is because most of the time you can see what people are wearing. I know I don't look at armbands because of that and I would suspect thats the thought of most players.

The reason we think its easier to look at headbands is because thats where we have trained our eyes to look. If we did that for armbands, it would be just as easy I think. You could also say that the armband must be on the upper portion of your sword arm. This way it cannot be hidden by a shield. (at least passively)

The arm band is already required to be on the 'weapon arm'.

It is easier to look at headbands because it is at or near eye-level. I would also surmise that most fighters are looking at the faces of their opponents once they have engaged in combat.

There is no good argument to move headbands to peoples arms. It is NOT easier to see armbands, based on the problems we already have about people not looking at armbands. Moving them to the arms does not change the mechanics of the spell or skill.

All anyone can say it is reduces the 'oddity' factor of our garb, and as much as I want to promote good looking people - giving up the clarity of headband armor for it is not worth it. Just my opinion.

John, I think you underestimate the value of looking in just one place. With an armband, I don't ever have to check to look for a cape, an armband, AND a headband. I simply glance at the arm, and there had better be something there if they get to shrug anything at all.

If you're going to move headbands to the arm, the trade-off had better be that the wearer needs to call their damn armor! A lot of people on the field already have issues calling their armor, be it worn, or magically induced.

Warmaster Caedes, Kinslayer Knight of Ched Nasad Patron Father of House LeDoucheHigh Priest of Ched NasadVicar of the Church of KhorneSteward of NorthHold House Ledouche: "We Bow to No Man...Because We Can't"

PadreCaedes wrote:If you're going to move headbands to the arm, the trade-off had better be that the wearer needs to call their * armor! A lot of people on the field already have issues calling their armor, be it worn, or magically induced.

Why would they need to call their armor? Armor wearers aren't required to do it now, so why make a bigger restriction for others. It's NICE to call your armor, but you don't have to. Just like you don't have to call your colors... It's just suggested.

The Amazing Iltztafein of House Dubh - CBLet me show you a magic trick...I'll make your money... DISAPPEAR!

"Players are expected to loudly announce the color of the weapon with which they are striking in order to promote smoother game play"

that does not say "suggested" it says "expected" just a fyi

in addition

"All weapons must be clearly marked with a strip of colored tape of the same color as the weapon type"

so really if one wanted to be a ass if it does not have the color of the damage you expect to be doing on the weapon then it should not be doing any damage because it would not be a legally marked weapon --- another FYI rofl

That being said I know I do not yell my weapon color every time I swing - but when I make a clear legal hit I tend to say the color right after the landing of the strike so that the blow followed by the color (said aloud) tend to reinforce that I think I made a legal hit on my opponent from my prospective.

++Respect those above your station and train others under you to surpass your achievements - while you treat others with the respect you expect to receive in return! ++